Monk Class Fixes

[Enchanter Tom]

Since there's been a lot of talk about monks on these forums, I've decided to create a thread dedicated to discussing how to fix them.

1. Monks add their Wisdom bonus to attack and damage rolls with monk weapons in place of their Strength modifier.

2. Monks get full BAB all the time. Ignore the clunky "but but but the monk can use his monk level as his BAB on a flurry and for his CMD" mechanical failure. (No, I don't care that it breaks the BAB/HD rule.)

3. Pretend that the Paizo vow of poverty doesn't exist.

4. Wholeness of Body is a swift action that heals 3d8 + monk level hit points. (None of this "standard action, low healing" junk. The ability doesn't need to be super powerful, but making a swift action with a slight boost in healing ability makes it worthwhile to use for 2 ki points.)

5. Quivering Palm: as a standard action, make a single melee attack. If the attack hits, the target must make a Fortitude save (DC 10 + 1/2 monk level + the monk's Wisdom modifier) or die. Consumes 5 ki points. (No reason to make it a random 1/day ability when the spellcasters are throwing out save-or-loses all day long from a range of 50 feet or more.)

6. Empty Body lasts 1 minute per monk level. (Seriously, 3 ki points to go ethereal for 1 minute? Lame.)

7. Nevermind, as Paizo apparently fixed this.

[TriOmegaZero]

1. Yes.
2. Yes.
3. YES.
4. Maybe make it like Lay On Hands so people won't complain as much.
5. Meh. Never cared about Quivering Palm.
6. Yes.
7. Paizo added something to fix it, but like most of the rules, it's not in an obvious and expected place.

[Deadmanwalking]

My Monk fixes, from my House Rules document:

The Monk’s unarmed damage progression, AC bonus, and movement are changed as follows:
1: 1d4/+0/+0 ft
2-6: 1d6/+1/+10 ft
7-11: 1d8/+2/+20 ft
12-16: 1d10/+3/+30 ft
17-20: 1d12/+4/+40 ft

These numbers are for a Medium creature. Adjust damage normally if their size is either greater or lesser.

However a Monk does receive a damage bonus equal to his Wisdom modifier on unarmed attacks and with all Monk weapons. A Zen Archer monk may do this with bows only when using his ki arrows ability.

The Monk is a full Base Attack Bonus Class. This makes the Flurry of Blows ability a bit less necessary. Maneuver Training is also thus completely redundant and does not exist. This doesn't change their hit die size.*

If the Monk does not otherwise move in a round, the +20 ft movement use of Ki points allows the Monk to move 20 ft + Monk bonus Speed as a Swift Action that provokes Attacks of Opportunity normally. If the Monk does otherwise move, it remains only a +20 ft bonus.

Amulet of Mighty Fists: In addition to providing a bonus on attacks, an AoMF also provides a bonus to Natural Armor equal to it’s rating, whether that rating is taken up by actual bonuses or effects such as Flaming. So a +1 Shocking, Flaming, Amulet of Mighty Fists also provides a +3 enhancement bonus to Natural Armor.

*I don't care that it breaks that rule either.

[TriOmegaZero]

Obligatory.

[Ajaxis]

Enchanter Tom wrote:

Since there's been a lot of talk about monks on these forums, I've decided to create a thread dedicated to discussing how to fix them.

. . .

7. Monks are proficient with their unarmed strikes. (That's a joke, as monks are technically not proficient with unarmed strikes. No, don't bother arguing it because nobody actually plays as if they are.)

Monks are proficient with unarmed strikes.

Core Rulebook (4th printing, pdf), p. 141: "All characters are proficient with unarmed strikes and any natural weapons possessed by
their race. A character who uses a weapon with which he is not proficient takes a –4 penalty on attack rolls."

(In the equipment section under simple, martial, and exotic weapons, which is a reasonably, if not optimal, place to put it.)

[Enchanter Tom]

That must be new in Pathfinder, then.

[Mikaze]

Yes to so much upthread.

Deadmanwalking's amulet idea in particular takes the sting of its cost down quite a bit.

[Marius Castille]

Ajaxis wrote:

Enchanter Tom wrote:

Since there's been a lot of talk about monks on these forums, I've decided to create a thread dedicated to discussing how to fix them.

. . .

7. Monks are proficient with their unarmed strikes. (That's a joke, as monks are technically not proficient with unarmed strikes. No, don't bother arguing it because nobody actually plays as if they are.)

Monks are proficient with unarmed strikes.

Core Rulebook (4th printing, pdf), p. 141: "All characters are proficient with unarmed strikes and any natural weapons possessed by
their race. A character who uses a weapon with which he is not proficient takes a –4 penalty on attack rolls."

(In the equipment section under simple, martial, and exotic weapons, which is a reasonably, if not optimal, place to put it.)

Sweet! One less house rule. ;)

[Mikaze]

J. Cayne wrote:

Let monk's enchant their own bodies (as one weapon) as though they had the Craft Arms and Armor feat, using their monk level as their spellcraft check. For each 1000gp in the enchantment cost they have to spend one day in a training montage.

[Caedwyr]

Something I did a while back to make monks work a bit more smoothly, bolded sections are the changes:

Modified Flurry of Blows wrote:

Flurry of Blows (Ex): Starting at 1st level, a monk can make a flurry of blows as a full-attack action. When doing so he may make one additional attack using any combination of unarmed strikes or attacks with a special monk weapon (kama, nunchaku, quarterstaff, sai, shuriken, and siangham) as if using the Two-Weapon Fighting feat (even if the monk does not meet the prerequisites for the feat). For the purpose of these attacks, the monk's base attack bonus is equal to his monk level. For all other purposes, such as qualifying for a feat or a prestige class, the monk uses his normal base attack bonus.

At 8th level, the monk can make two additional attacks when he uses flurry of blows, as if using Improved Two-Weapon Fighting (even if the monk does not meet the prerequisites for the feat).

At 15th level, the monk can make three additional attacks using flurry of blows, as if using Greater Two-Weapon Fighting (even if the monk does not meet the prerequisites for the feat).

A monk applies his full Strength bonus to his damage rolls for all successful attacks made with flurry of blows, whether the attacks are made with an off-hand or with a weapon wielded in both hands. A monk may substitute disarm, sunder, and trip combat maneuvers for unarmed attacks as part of a flurry of blows. A monk cannot use any weapon other than an unarmed strike or a special monk weapon as part of a flurry of blows unless the weapon has the Ki-Focus enhancement and the monk has taken the Weapon Focus feat in the chosen weapon's type. A monk with natural weapons cannot make natural attacks in addition to his flurry of blows attacks.

Modified Fast Movement wrote:

Fast Movement (Ex): At 3rd level, a monk gains an enhancement bonus to his base speed, as shown on Table: Monk. This bonus applies to any form of movement that the monk has access to permanently. A monk in armor or carrying a medium or heavy load loses this extra speed.

Modified Wholeness of Body wrote:

Wholeness of Body (Su): At 7th level or higher, a monk can heal his own wounds as a swift action. He can heal a number of hit points of damage as per Lay On Hands, counting his monk levels as paladin levels for the purpose of this ability, by using 2 points from his ki pool. The monk does not require free hands to use this ability.

Modified Abundant Step wrote:

Abundant Step (Su): At 12th level or higher, a monk can slip magically between spaces, as if using the spell dimension door. Using this ability is a move action that consumes 2 points from his ki pool. His caster level for this effect is equal to his monk level. He cannot take other creatures with him when he uses this ability. Using this ability does not prevent the monk from taking other actions this turn and does not automatically end the monk's turn.

Modified Bonus Feat wrote:

Bonus Feat: At 1st level, 2nd level, and every 4 levels thereafter, a monk may select a bonus feat. These feats must be taken from the following list: Catch Off-Guard, Combat Reflexes, Deflect Arrows, Dodge, Improved Grapple, Scorpion Style, and Throw Anything. At 6th level, the following feats are added to the list: Gorgon's Fist, Greater Bull Rush, Greater Disarm, Greater Feint, Greater Grapple, Greater Sunder, Greater Trip, Improved Bull Rush, Improved Disarm, Improved Feint, Improved Trip, Mobility, and Wind Stance. At 10th level, the following feats are added to the list: Improved Critical, Lightning Stance, Medusa's Wrath, Snatch Arrows, and Spring Attack. A monk need not have any of the prerequisites normally required for these feats to select them.

Modified Maneuver Training wrote:

Maneuver Training (Ex): At 3rd level, a monk uses his monk level in place of his base attack bonus when calculating his Combat Maneuver Bonus. Base attack bonuses granted from other classes are unaffected and are added normally. The monk does not provoke attacks of opportunity when performing combat maneuvers.

[Dabbler]

Enchanter Tom wrote:

1. Monks add their Wisdom bonus to attack and damage rolls with monk weapons in place of their Strength modifier.

No, that's not really justified without some expenditure. Weapon Finesse as a free feat isn't a bad idea though.

My logic here is, you need to hit to do damage. Nothing scales back average damage like lowering the to-hit bonus. Nothing increases it more than increasing the hit bonus.

Enchanter Tom wrote:

2. Monks get full BAB all the time. Ignore the clunky "but but but the monk can use his monk level as his BAB on a flurry and for his CMD" mechanical failure. (No, I don't care that it breaks the BAB/HD rule.)

Yes, absolutely. Monks are going to end up with lower HP than fighters even with d10 hit dice (remember, full BAB is linked to d10 hit dice) because of their MADness.

Enchanter Tom wrote:

3. Pretend that the Paizo vow of poverty doesn't exist.

Already did that.

Enchanter Tom wrote:

4. Wholeness of Body is a swift action that heals 3d8 + monk level hit points. (None of this "standard action, low healing" junk. The ability doesn't need to be super powerful, but making a swift action with a slight boost in healing ability makes it worthwhile to use for 2 ki points.)

Doesn't matter how much it heals, it needs to be a swift action. Allowing a Heal check to use it on others would be cool too.

Enchanter Tom wrote:

5. Quivering Palm: as a standard action, make a single melee attack. If the attack hits, the target must make a Fortitude save (DC 10 + 1/2 monk level + the monk's Wisdom modifier) or die. Consumes 5 ki points. (No reason to make it a random 1/day ability when the spellcasters are throwing out save-or-loses all day long from a range of 50 feet or more.)

Agreed.

Enchanter Tom wrote:

6. Empty Body lasts 1 minute per monk level. (Seriously, 3 ki points to go ethereal for 1 minute? Lame.)

Really not bothered on this one.

@Caedwyr, I like those changes!

[Gravefiller613]

Mikaze wrote:

J. Cayne wrote:

Let monk's enchant their own bodies (as one weapon) as though they had the Craft Arms and Armor feat, using their monk level as their spellcraft check. For each 1000gp in the enchantment cost they have to spend one day in a training montage.

That's similar to what I allow.

The difference is I allow monk's to enchant their bodies up to a maximum of their wisdom modifier.

and I allow for ki to be used to caste magic fang, greater magic fang, and barkskin at levels 8,10, and 12.

[The Shaman]

I'm tempted to use the MoFaerun gauntlets as cheaper alternatives to the Amulet, especially as they are made for characters who only have two limbs they attack with, not creatures with 10-15 natural attacks. Something like that, or the gloves from the NWN games, would provide a cheaper alternative for the monk.

[Mathmuse]

Caedwyr wrote:

Modified Fast Movement wrote:

Fast Movement (Ex): At 3rd level, a monk gains an enhancement bonus to his base speed, as shown on Table: Monk. This bonus applies to any form of movement that the monk has access to permanently. A monk in armor or carrying a medium or heavy load loses this extra speed.

...

One contradiction in the monk's design is that it is meant to have high mobility, yet its best attack, Flurry of Blows, is a full-attack action that combines poorly with movement.

I have been considering a house rule to apply the monk's Fast Movement to the one form of movement allowed with a Flurry of Blows.

Quote:

Extended Five-Foot Step(Ex): The monk can apply up to half his movement bonus from his Fast Movement class ability when he takes a 5-foot step. Thus, at 3rd level the monk can move 10 feet as a 5-foot step, at 6th level he can move 15 feet as a 5-foot step, and so on.

Thus, a sixth-level monk, when making a Flurry of Blows against an opponent who drops after the second blow, can move up to 15 feet in the middle of the Flurry of Blows to attack another opponent with his last blow in the Flurry.

[Deadmanwalking]

Mathmuse wrote:

One contradiction in the monk's design is that it is meant to have high mobility, yet its best attack, Flurry of Blows, is a full-attack action that combines poorly with movement.

Agreed! My House Rules, too, contain a solution (allowing Monks to move 20 ft. + Monk Bonus Speed as a Swift Action with a Ki Point).

[The Shaman]

Has anyone tried putting feats that allow more attacks as a standard action on the monk bonus feat list? I don't remember the names so far, but iirc 3.5 had a feat allowing attacks with two weapons as a standard action, and allowing a 2nd and 3rd attack on a spring attack.

[overdark]

Why does everyone seem to think the monk needs beefed up? I've seen several 3.5 monks run successfully and have personally run a Pathfinder monk and had fun doing it. I think that the monk is fine the way it is. Mostly.

[Caedwyr]

overdark wrote:

Why does everyone seem to think the monk needs beefed up? I've seen several 3.5 monks run successfully and have personally run a Pathfinder monk and had fun doing it. I think that the monk is fine the way it is. Mostly.

Most of the changes I've listed above are more quality of life and playing nice with other class changes and not straight up power ups. Personally, I agree that the monk is mostly fine but not for the typical playstyle for a melee class.

[Deadmanwalking]

overdark wrote:

Why does everyone seem to think the monk needs beefed up? I've seen several 3.5 monks run successfully and have personally run a Pathfinder monk and had fun doing it. I think that the monk is fine the way it is. Mostly.

The only Monk I've ever seen played was by someone new to Pathfinder, and unlike the rest of us newbies*, despite well-rolled scores and a good Race choice (Dwarf), he was the single least effective PC. Why? He tried to play the class like it says it should be played, as a straightforward front-line damage dealer...and just couldn't. He just flat-out didn't have the ability to do it, and he thus had much less fun in the game than he might have otherwise.

Monks are bad enough at what they ostensibly do to be an actual trap for new players and potentially actively hurt players' enjoyment of the game...so they need to be fixed.

*It's worth noting that we were only newbies to Pathfinder, not RPGs in general, so it's not like we weren't trying to optimize or anything like that. Monks are just really tough to make effectively.

[Marius Castille]

Would changing monk hit die from d8 to d10 (along with adding full BAB) be too much?

[TriOmegaZero]

Marius Castille wrote:

Would changing monk hit die from d8 to d10 (along with adding full BAB) be too much?

In the many games I have playtested such a change, it has not been.

[Deadmanwalking]

Marius Castille wrote:

Would changing monk hit die from d8 to d10 (along with adding full BAB) be too much?

On it's own? Probably not, but it also won't actually help as much as it might seem like at first glance.

In combination with some of the fixes outlined here? Depends on which specifically.

[Lobolusk]

I think more types of attacks or more options during grapple, ie throwing a enemy reversals ect... are needed i think more focus on monk only combat maneuver options. for example:
11. Santini Toss: during a grapple you can make a appropriate strength check and if you can lift the foe (your strength bonus allows you to lift a certain weight) you can toss a opponent using you ranged attack bonus and if they hit a target they take 1d6 plus half your level and the opponents hit by the foe must make a reflex save dc 10 plus ½ your level + ½ your grapple CMB or fall prone prerequisite: improved grapple, throw anything, skill focus acrobatics

or
2. Reversal: if your opponents makes a failed grapple check against you and it misses your CMD by 5 or more as a immediate action you can start a automatic grapple, if you fail and miss the targets CMD by 5 or more they get an automatic grapple against you
Prerequisites: improved grapple, combat maneuvers, does not apply to “tackle grapples” the opponent must have his feet on the ground for this feat to function.

or even:

1. Santo slam: if you make a successful acrobatics check prior to a grapple you can add half your acrobatics ranks rounded down to your proceeding grapple check, provided when the grapple takes place your feet are not on solid ground(i.e. flying through the air)
Prerequisites: improved grapple, skill focus (acrobatics)

[Lobolusk]

Enchanter Tom wrote:

Since there's been a lot of talk about monks on these forums, I've decided to create a thread dedicated to discussing how to fix them.

1. Monks add their Wisdom bonus to attack and damage rolls with monk weapons in place of their Strength modifier.

I think taking out the strength bonus and substituting it for wisdom is an option or maybe somebody has already said being able to use kit strike to do that. but they shouldn't get both str and wis. also i like taking away the wis to armor and being to put it into attack like power attack kinda.

[overdark]

Deadmanwalking wrote:

overdark wrote:

Why does everyone seem to think the monk needs beefed up? I've seen several 3.5 monks run successfully and have personally run a Pathfinder monk and had fun doing it. I think that the monk is fine the way it is. Mostly.

The only Monk I've ever seen played was by someone new to Pathfinder, and unlike the rest of us newbies*, despite well-rolled scores and a good Race choice (Dwarf), he was the single least effective PC. Why? He tried to play the class like it says it should be played, as a straightforward front-line damage dealer...and just couldn't. He just flat-out didn't have the ability to do it, and he thus had much less fun in the game than he might have otherwise.

Monks are bad enough at what they ostensibly do to be an actual trap for new players and potentially actively hurt players' enjoyment of the game...so they need to be fixed.

*It's worth noting that we were only newbies to Pathfinder, not RPGs in general, so it's not like we weren't trying to optimize or anything like that. Monks are just really tough to make effectively.

Monks are not front-line fighters they are more like rogues in regards to their fighting capabilities. Comparing them to a fighter is like comparing a Ford Ranger to a Ford F-150, sure they're both trucks but thats about it. Monks are flanking, and support fighters. If you stand toe to toe with a monster and get yer ass handed to you, you deserve it. You should be using your skills and special abilities to navigate the battlefield and strike when it is advantageous for you. The class works right out of the book with no changes. Yes, to be an effective monk you need 3 or 4 good stats (same with a paladin). But the class doesn't need to be changed, if the "fighter" in your party is a monk, then your party paradigm needs to be re-evaluated. Not the class.

[overdark]

Lobolusk wrote:

Enchanter Tom wrote:

Since there's been a lot of talk about monks on these forums, I've decided to create a thread dedicated to discussing how to fix them.

1. Monks add their Wisdom bonus to attack and damage rolls with monk weapons in place of their Strength modifier.

I think taking out the strength bonus and substituting it for wisdom is an option or maybe somebody has already said being able to use ki strike to do that. but they shouldn't get both str and wis. also i like taking away the wis to armor and being to put it into attack like power attack kinda.

A feat that does this or a ki ability that does this would be cool, maybe Ultimate Combat will have some cool stuff like this.

[Deadmanwalking]

overdark wrote:

Monks are not front-line fighters they are more like rogues in regards to their fighting capabilities. Comparing them to a fighter is like comparing a Ford Ranger to a Ford F-150, sure they're both trucks but thats about it. Monks are flanking, and support fighters. If you stand toe to toe with a monster and get yer ass handed to you, you deserve it. You should be using your skills and special abilities to navigate the battlefield and strike when it is advantageous for you. The class works right out of the book with no changes. Yes, to be an effective monk you need 3 or 4 good stats (same with a paladin). But the class doesn't need to be changed, if the "fighter" in your party is a monk, then your party paradigm needs to be re-evaluated. Not the class.

I suppose we have different definitions of 'front-line'. I was playing a very front-line Rogue in the same game...and had no trouble being one of the most impressive damage dealers in the game (in fairness, our only 'real' frontliner was the Barbarian, but I was miles ahead of the Monk). And the Monk still sucked. Fighting whole boatloads of creatures with DR (lots of Devils) didn't help, but wasn't the only source of the problem either.

[overdark]

Deadmanwalking wrote:

I suppose we have different definitions of 'front-line'. I was playing a very front-line Rogue in the same game...and had no trouble being one of the most impressive damage dealers in the game (in fairness, our only 'real' frontliner was the Barbarian, but I was miles ahead of the Monk). And the Monk still sucked. Fighting whole boatloads of creatures with DR (lots of Devils) didn't help, but wasn't the only source of the problem either.

Yes it is possible to use a rogue or monk as a frontline combatant but its not what the classes were designed for. I'm unsure as to exactly what everyoone dislikes about the monk here. I just don't get it I ran a monk through the Second Darkness AP and had a great time (even against the hordes of demons).

[wraithstrike]

overdark wrote:

Deadmanwalking wrote:

I suppose we have different definitions of 'front-line'. I was playing a very front-line Rogue in the same game...and had no trouble being one of the most impressive damage dealers in the game (in fairness, our only 'real' frontliner was the Barbarian, but I was miles ahead of the Monk). And the Monk still sucked. Fighting whole boatloads of creatures with DR (lots of Devils) didn't help, but wasn't the only source of the problem either.

Yes it is possible to use a rogue or monk as a frontline combatant but its not what the classes were designed for. I'm unsure as to exactly what everyoone dislikes about the monk here. I just don't get it I ran a monk through the Second Darkness AP and had a great time (even against the hordes of demons).

You have to be a good player to run a monk well or you need a lenient GM. On the other hand you can be a new player and do decently well with a fighter. You might not even to do bad with a caster once you catch on to which spells work and stop forgetting to cast defensively.

[overdark]

wraithstrike wrote:

You have to be a good player to run a monk well or you need a lenient GM. On the other hand you can be a new player and do decently well with a fighter. You might not even to do bad with a caster once you catch on to which spells work and stop forgetting to cast defensively.

OK, I'll agree with you on that. The monk (and a few other classes) are more advanced than your basic fighter. But why does the monk need to be changed for that reason, if your inexperienced you should stick to something a bit more basic.

Spell casters are the same way if your just starting and really want to cast spells you should probably be a sorcerer instead of a wizard just to keep things a bit simpler.

So again what is the problem with the monk here?

[vidmaster]

hmm how about a MA feat chain that allows you to use some of your movement during a full attack maybe you lose one attack every 5 ft you move. 10 with another feat. use would be a full round action naturally.

[overdark]

vidmaster wrote:

hmm how about a MA feat chain that allows you to use some of your movement during a full attack maybe you lose one attack every 5 ft you move. 10 with another feat. use would be a full round action naturally.

Great idea for Ultimate Combat but isn't this really just the same as an expanded spring attack feat tree?

[wraithstrike]

overdark wrote:

wraithstrike wrote:

You have to be a good player to run a monk well or you need a lenient GM. On the other hand you can be a new player and do decently well with a fighter. You might not even to do bad with a caster once you catch on to which spells work and stop forgetting to cast defensively.

OK, I'll agree with you on that. The monk (and a few other classes) are more advanced than your basic fighter. But why does the monk need to be changed for that reason, if your inexperienced you should stick to something a bit more basic.

Spell casters are the same way if your just starting and really want to cast spells you should probably be a sorcerer instead of a wizard just to keep things a bit simpler.

So again what is the problem with the monk here?

Many people feel like playing something as simple as an unarmed combatant should not be denied. It is a common thing to want to do. The problem is that with the monk it is not so simple.

The monk appears to be easier to run than it actually is. At least with a caster, once you see all the special rules you might back off before getting deep into it. There is less likely to be a "what have I gotten myself into" feeling later on.

[vidmaster]

hmm i didn't think about that. i like the flavor of my option better seems more intuitive but i guess it would function very similarly. maybe with less feat commitment then those and i don't think the spring attack one would work as well with a monk since it only allowed the standard attacks and FOB is not very standard (8 attacks so move 5 fet still 7 etc. etc.)

[ericthecleric]

Here are my suggestions to give the Qinggong monk more “oomph”. I’m not sure if this is the right thread to post in. :-/ Anyway.

Feats: When you spend the ki points to use a feat, you retain use of that feat for one hour, or until you spend ki points to use a different feat.

Spell-Like Abilities: Each SLA has a minimum qinggong level equal to 2x spell level, plus two. So, minimum level is 4 for a 1st-level SLA, 6 for a 2nd-level SLA, through to 20 for a 9th-level SLA. Each SLA costs a number of ki points to use equal to their spell level, unless they have a listed ki cost that is lower (but see the new feat below). This should allow for a great deal of flexibility and hopefully more fun!

When players select SLAs, they should be cleared by GM’s first; for example, a GM might disallow “ostentatious” SLAs like black tentacles, guards and wards, teleport, or the hand spells, or any other potential SLAs they deem inappropriate. As an example, a qinggong monk might have mirror image (min level 6, 2 ki points), stoneskin (min level 10, 4 ki points), and disintegrate (min level 14, 6 ki points). Another qinggong monk might have fireball and fly (both min level 8, 3 ki points), and fireshield, and wall of fire (both min level 10, 4 ki points), for a fire themed monk.

New Feat:
Efficient Ki Use
You can use ki more efficiently than other ki users.
Prerequisites: Qinggong monk archetype, monk level 5.
Benefit: When a qinggong monk uses a qinggong SLA, the cost of the SLA is reduced by two ki points. This cannot reduce the cost of the SLA below 1 ki point. If the ki cost of using a particular SLA is reduced in this way, that SLA cannot be used more than three times per day (although those subsequent uses also gain the reduced ki cost).
If using a feat, the cost of the feat is reduced by 2 points, but not below 1 ki point.
Special: This feat can be taken multiple times, each time reducing the ki cost of a qinggong SLA by an additional two points. It cannot be gained more than three times, however.

Why make these changes? Well, a 20th-level monk with 26 Wis would have 18 ki. With all the vows (except poverty) this would add 27 points, for 45 total. All those vows would probably be difficult to RP though.
A 10th-level monk with 18 Wis would have 8 ki, plus 13 from all the other vows (except poverty; +2 celibacy, +3 chains, +2 cleanliness, +1 fasting, +2 peace, +1 silence, +2 truth), for 21 total. Most monks would not have *all* those vows at the same time, as they would probably be difficult to RP together. So to ensure maximum flexibility, these suggested changes would allow the monk to use the SLAs *and* the standard (Core RPG) ki uses while still allowing more regular use of his other abilities.
Thoughts? Overpowered, about right?

[overdark]

wraithstrike wrote:

overdark wrote:

wraithstrike wrote:

You have to be a good player to run a monk well or you need a lenient GM. On the other hand you can be a new player and do decently well with a fighter. You might not even to do bad with a caster once you catch on to which spells work and stop forgetting to cast defensively.

OK, I'll agree with you on that. The monk (and a few other classes) are more advanced than your basic fighter. But why does the monk need to be changed for that reason, if your inexperienced you should stick to something a bit more basic.

Spell casters are the same way if your just starting and really want to cast spells you should probably be a sorcerer instead of a wizard just to keep things a bit simpler.

So again what is the problem with the monk here?

Many people feel like playing something as simple as an unarmed combatant should not be denied. It is a common thing to want to do. The problem is that with the monk it is not so simple.

The monk appears to be easier to run than it actually is. At least with a caster, once you see all the special rules you might back off before getting deep into it. There is less likely to be a "what have I gotten myself into" feeling later on.

A good GM would eliminate this problem, by cautioning a newb about the complexities of the monk before they started. They should do this for any class any new player is interested in playing to avoid character hatred later in the game.

So what is the problem with the monk?

[Gloom]

1) Give monks an ability that allows them to improve the DC of their Stunning Blow attack by +2 and +4 (Similar to the Improved/Greater maneuvers) possibly add a bonus ability for the greater ability that says you can take a single standard action if the stunning blow lands.

2) Add a feat that anyone can take that will allow a standard action as part of a Spring Attack.

Monks fixed. Get on with your life.

Oh, you want to enchant your bodies and be that "ZOMG AWESOME MONK FROM Any Martial Arts Movie Evar!" then get over it, or ask your DM for possible houserules. This does not need to be a rule in the main book for all players. It doesn't even need to be a variant.

[Revan]

Monks are problematic because they simply do not function in the way that they seem to. For example, they appear to be, and are touted as the class that least requires gear, but in reality, they are incredibly gear dependent. They require the overpriced Amulet of Mighty Fists to get their unarmed strike to keep pace with a fighter's weaponry, boatloads of stat-boosting items, brass knuckles or actual weapons to bypass DR which otherwise completely hoses their damage output, and Barkskin/Bracers of Armor/etc. for their AC to keep pace. The reason they need those stat-boosters is that they are brutally MAD, to a degree no other class in the game after the PF Pathfinder revisions. They need Wisdom for AC and Ki Points, Dex for AC, Strength for damage output and CMB, Constitution for HP, and at least a 13 Intelligence if they want to do half the Combat Maneuvers their archetype suggests should be second nature--more to cover a decent array of skills. Thematically and balance-wise, they really deserve options that expand the benefits of Wisdom and/or Dexterity, preferably in a way that at least partially covers for the lack of significant strength.

[overdark]

vidmaster wrote:

hmm i didn't think about that. i like the flavor of my option better seems more intuitive but i guess it would function very similarly. maybe with less feat commitment then those and i don't think the spring attack one would work as well with a monk since it only allowed the standard attacks and FOB is not very standard (8 attacks so move 5 fet still 7 etc. etc.)

If you only move 5 feet you can still get all 8 attacks with no feat.

I get your point though, but an expanded Spring Attack tree (which I will bet you is in Ultimate Combat) solves these issues easier and builds on the core monk rules (monks can take Dodge, Mobility, and Spring Atack as bonus feats) so expanding on this just makes more sense than involving a new feat tree.

[vidmaster]

hmm maybe have it as an extension of the spring attack tree instead (yeah i realized the first 5 would be free after i posted it) i still never liked the expanded spring attack tree to much investment.

[overdark]

Revan wrote:

Monks are problematic because they simply do not function in the way that they seem to. For example, they appear to be, and are touted as the class that least requires gear, but in reality, they are incredibly gear dependent. They require the overpriced Amulet of Mighty Fists to get their unarmed strike to keep pace with a fighter's weaponry, boatloads of stat-boosting items, brass knuckles or actual weapons to bypass DR which otherwise completely hoses their damage output, and Barkskin/Bracers of Armor/etc. for their AC to keep pace. The reason they need those stat-boosters is that they are brutally MAD, to a degree no other class in the game after the PF Pathfinder revisions. They need Wisdom for AC and Ki Points, Dex for AC, Strength for damage output and CMB, Constitution for HP, and at least a 13 Intelligence if they want to do half the Combat Maneuvers their archetype suggests should be second nature--more to cover a decent array of skills. Thematically and balance-wise, they really deserve options that expand the benefits of Wisdom and/or Dexterity, preferably in a way that at least partially covers for the lack of significant strength.

OK here we go...

Nowhere in the introduction of the monk class or its role does it say anything about gear, yes monks need gear too, just like everyone else in the game. And yes you need 3 or 4 good stats (like a paladin) to be a monk (can we agree that 14 is a good stat?).

If you don't have the stats for some feat prereq's you can take those feats as monk bonus feats.

The rest just comes down to a feeling that I'm getting here that unless you have 4 18's and 2 16's for your character (regardless of class) you're just not gonna be happy.

EDIT: My monk had the following stats...(at 1st level)
STR 13
DEX 15
CON 14
INT 13
WIS 16
CHA 12

[overdark]

vidmaster wrote:

hmm maybe have it as an extension of the spring attack tree instead (yeah i realized the first 5 would be free after i posted it) i still never liked the expanded spring attack tree to much investment.

If you want to move and attack and move and attack and move and attack you should have to invest.

Monks get Spring Attack for free, so the additonal 2 or 3 feats would not be a big investment for them. And for anyone (besides a fighter) to do it, it should be a huge investment.

[Caedwyr]

To be honest, spring attack is more attractive for the 'not triggering attacks of opportunity from the target' than the hit and run part, most of the time.

[phantom1592]

I haven't played a monk in Pathfinder yet, so most of the 'problems' I don't have an opinion on...

However my all time favorite character was very 'monk-like' in 2E. He was basically an unarmed 'martial artist'.

I couldn't make him in Pathfinder... It's that STUPID 'Lawful' requirement. I would LOVE to see that get tossed out the window.

Yes, 'Lawful' makes sense if your going for some stereo-typical buddhist/shaolin monk....

but what about all the other Chuck Norris, Van Damme, Segal, Jackie Chan type characters out there? Elric was the most 'good' character I ever played, and he was CG, (NG is also a possiblitiy looking back...) He wouldn't have been NEARLY as fun if I'd been locked into Lawful.

I'm not really a fan of ANY class dictating your alignment (except Paladins of course...)

[vidmaster]

if you want to play a straight Martial artist just make a figther and take the unarmed branch.

[vidmaster]

phantom1592 wrote:

I haven't played a monk in Pathfinder yet, so most of the 'problems' I don't have an opinion on...

However my all time favorite character was very 'monk-like' in 2E. He was basically an unarmed 'martial artist'.

I couldn't make him in Pathfinder... It's that STUPID 'Lawful' requirement. I would LOVE to see that get tossed out the window.

Yes, 'Lawful' makes sense if your going for some stereo-typical buddhist/shaolin monk....

but what about all the other Chuck Norris, Van Damme, Segal, Jackie Chan type characters out there? Elric was the most 'good' character I ever played, and he was CG, (NG is also a possiblitiy looking back...) He wouldn't have been NEARLY as fun if I'd been locked into Lawful.

I'm not really a fan of ANY class dictating your alignment (except Paladins of course...)

since when are chuck dan damme segal and chan...... monks? martial artists =/= monk

[TriOmegaZero]

vidmaster wrote:

since when are chuck dan damme segal and chan...... monks? martial artists =/= monk

Agreed. I would place them as fighters for the most part, maybe some barbarian/ranger here and there. Possibly a bit of rogue as well.

None of them really show any monk type abilities besides unarmed strikes.

[Gloom]

People, please understand. Monks are supposed to be good at maneuvers, yes. Monks can get as bonus feats, without meeting the prerequisites...

Improved Trip
Improved Grapple
Improved Disarm
Improved Feint..

Those are pretty much the maneuvers that Monks are supposed to be "touted" as having.

They do NOT require combat expertise. So please, shut up about the 13 Int requirement for Monks. It does not require that.

Bull Rush and Overrun both require Power Attack so that has nothing to do with Int.

If you want to pick up the greater version of the feats then wait until you get the Improved version as a bonus feat. Greater Grapple, Greater Bull Rush, and Greater Overrun do not require Combat Expertise... If you want Greater Trip/Feint/Disarm... well, those require much more expertise then the Improved Versions and imo should require Combat Expertise.

If you want more then Trip, Grapple, Disarm, and Feint.. well then, invest into Combat Expertise. It's not a bad feat anyway. It's a good way to gain a quick bit of AC when you're in a tough situation.

Anything other then this, ask your GM if you can pick up the Greater version of whatever Improved maneuver you have as a bonus feat if you use it a lot they will most likely say yes. I don't think it's appropriate for all cases thus it should not be in the default rule set.

[Gloom]

Also, for Monks being less dependent on equipment.. That has never been said or printed in any of the books. If you really want to stress a character with that view point then invest your money into other things.. Enchanted Monks Robes.. Tattoos.. Etc.. You can play a character with little equipment that still has the magical effects. You don't need to do it with Feats or House Rules.

If you want to do it with house rules and your GM is cool with it, then yay!

Otherwise.. stop fighting for Monks that can do retarded things without gear.

PLEASE. I'm tired of reading that crap.

[Revan]

overdark wrote:

Revan wrote:

Monks are problematic because they simply do not function in the way that they seem to. For example, they appear to be, and are touted as the class that least requires gear, but in reality, they are incredibly gear dependent. They require the overpriced Amulet of Mighty Fists to get their unarmed strike to keep pace with a fighter's weaponry, boatloads of stat-boosting items, brass knuckles or actual weapons to bypass DR which otherwise completely hoses their damage output, and Barkskin/Bracers of Armor/etc. for their AC to keep pace. The reason they need those stat-boosters is that they are brutally MAD, to a degree no other class in the game after the PF Pathfinder revisions. They need Wisdom for AC and Ki Points, Dex for AC, Strength for damage output and CMB, Constitution for HP, and at least a 13 Intelligence if they want to do half the Combat Maneuvers their archetype suggests should be second nature--more to cover a decent array of skills. Thematically and balance-wise, they really deserve options that expand the benefits of Wisdom and/or Dexterity, preferably in a way that at least partially covers for the lack of significant strength.

OK here we go...

Nowhere in the introduction of the monk class or its role does it say anything about gear, yes monks need gear too, just like everyone else in the game. And yes you need 3 or 4 good stats (like a paladin) to be a monk (can we agree that 14 is a good stat?).

If you don't have the stats for some feat prereq's you can take those feats as monk bonus feats.

The rest just comes down to a feeling that I'm getting here that unless you have 4 18's and 2 16's for your character (regardless of class) you're just not gonna be happy.

EDIT: My monk had the following stats...(at 1st level)
STR 13
DEX 15
CON 14
INT 13
WIS 16
CHA 12

14 is a good stat, but it's not a good stat for a monk. A wizard is happy with a 14 in any non-Intelligence stat, because that's a nice bonus, but not necessary. A paladin would probably prefer at least a 16 in Strength, but he can manage with a 14, because he gets massive to-hit bonuses from Charisma when he smites, which also boosts his damage to make up for a less-than-superior strength. Similar with Wisdom or Constitution. With the mileage he gets out of Charisma, the Paladin can afford to take a decent-but-not-stellar score in Strength, or Con, or Wisdom. A far cry from the 3.x paladin, who needed a superior Strength, Wisdom, Charisma, and Constitution to compete, and even then, poorly. That's the position the monk is in now, as he was in 3.5. If his Strength is 14 or less, his damage and ability to hit suffer significantly; if Dex or Wis are only decent, he's not as dodgy as he needs to be, and in the case of Wisdom, the saves of his special abilities will be seriously subpar. Less than stellar Con? Really hard for him to take a hit, which becomes especially painful when combined with that low AC, and their inability to use their maneuverability in combination with their primary offensive tactics.

As to their bonus feats--note that the Greater [Maneuver] Feats are nowhere on the list. You want to be a maneuver happy monk, you still need Power Attack and/or Combat Expertise to specialize fully. To my mind, that's as much of a problem with the way the [Maneuver] feats work as anything else, but there it is.

I'll leave it to others who are better at the math than I to dissect exactly how your monk's stats can be problematic. The point is, I would like that to be a nice stat array, hence my desire to give them a real full BAB; add Wisdom and Dexterity based powers, feats, and other such options; and institute other miscellaneous buffs.

Seriously, anyone want to explain to me why it's over twice as expensive for a monk to get the same weapon enchantments that his buddies are using? (Amulet of Mighty Fists is 2.5 times the cost of an equally enchanted weapon.)